ShareThis Page

This Predators fan won Stanley Cup Final tickets – and didn't even know it

| Monday, July 17, 2017, 6:51 p.m.
Chaz Palla | Tribune-Review
Evgeni Malkin and Sidney Crosby kiss the Stanley Cup after beating the Predator in the Stanley Cup Final Sunday, June 11 , 2017 at Bridgestone Arena.

Andrew Fudge wanted nothing more than to be at Bridgestone Arena to cheer on the Nashville Predators against the Penguins in the Stanley Cup Final.

When his opportunity came, he – let's say in ice hockey terms – lost an edge.

Fudge of Clarksville, Tenn., won two tickets to Game 6 through a contest run by the Predators through Twitter. Problem is, he only learned of his winnings Monday morning .

Fudge told Yahoo Sports that he seldom checks his Twitter account. After entering the contest for Cup tickets, he said he simply forgot to check back.

The Penguins won 2-0 to claim their second consecutive Stanley Cup championship.

Fudge told Greg Wyshynski of Yahoo that he actually enter a similar contest before Game 4.

After an unsuccessful try, he opted for one last attempt for Game 6 "as a Hail Mary," he told Yahoo.

The Twittersphere, of course, took notice.

Fudge told Yahoo he hopes that perhaps he will still score tickets to Predators game, albeit with a lot less riding on the outcome.

"I'm hoping maybe there could be something. I have a wife that's (ticked off) at me and a 2-year-old son and a 7-month-old daughter who will hold it over my head forever when they realize what happened," he said. "But if not, I accept my misfortune and the fact that I dropped the ball ... big time."

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.